Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: hazelspapa Date: Oct 7, 2011 6:58pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Did Dropping Acid Make Steve Jobs More Creative?

Mr. Kelley, I'll simply refer everyone back to your own words regarding how one should speak of the dead. "Lobbying (sic) gratuitous shots at dead people that never did any harm to anyone is just plain trashy." I couldn't agree more.

Here's the original post - http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=395430

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: patkelleyPA Date: Oct 8, 2011 4:47am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Did Dropping Acid Make Steve Jobs More Creative?

Once again, I am speaking of facts, not just gratuitous shit-talking. But nice try at being clever.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SpacedAgain Date: Oct 8, 2011 5:42pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Did Dropping Acid Make Steve Jobs More Creative?

There's some evidence that it's true, and John Markoff's book finally leverage what I had heard years before. I heard that Jobs required his engineers to pass an acid test of some sort.

There were studies done through the short-lived Institute for Psychedelic Research at San Francisco State College, led by Willis Harman (Stanford engineering prof), later to become president of the Institute of Noetic Sciences.
http://www.hofmann.org/papers/creative/psychreports.html

Also part of the pilot study was James Fadiman, co-author of Essential Sufism with Robert Frager, and Robert McKim, who was influential among interface designers:
http://www.amazon.com/Experiences-Visual-Thinking-Robert-McKim/dp/0818504110

There was also a little book on the subject, LSD — The Problem-Solving Psychedelic, by P.G. Stafford and B.H. Golightly.
http://www.psychedelic-library.org/staf3.htm

While LSD is not physically addictive (it doesn't work after 3 days), the danger is that some may associate the vehicle with the goal and certain states as the ultimate. The issue of psychoactive drugs is fascinating AND problematic. For many it just may open doors that they are not prepared to deal with, and makes me think of Charles Upton's writing on "fissures in the great wall".

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hazelspapa Date: Oct 8, 2011 7:03pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Non-dead - What's more "disgraceful"

I should know better.

This post was modified by hazelspapa on 2011-10-09 01:34:45

This post was modified by hazelspapa on 2011-10-09 02:03:45

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Oct 8, 2011 2:54pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Non-dead - What's more 'disgraceful'

and you went and created a user account because you were just burning with an insane desire to say what you had to say? so this would be your intro or first time post on the forum then? disgraceful. or are you a regular here who created this 'fake' account to therefore cowardly speak out? fucking disgraceful

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hazelspapa Date: Oct 8, 2011 7:08pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Non-dead - What's more 'disgraceful'

Longtime archive user, first time post. Generally seems like a waste of time. Just thought the comments were inappropriate at this time and felt compelled to say so. Momentary lapse of reason.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Oct 9, 2011 7:29am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Non-dead - What's more 'disgraceful'

whatever you say Koch, go take your meds...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hazelspapa Date: Oct 9, 2011 8:40am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Non-dead - What's more 'disgraceful'

So, all you've got is name calling and innuendo?
The momentary lapse of reason is referring to thinking that you all would have an open mind and actually think about what someone has written. As I said, I should know better.
BTW, I edited the previous post because that is the best I can do under the circumstances to right my wrongs (allowing myself to become hypocritical with my choice of words and tone).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: patkelleyPA Date: Oct 8, 2011 4:08pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Non-dead - What's more 'disgraceful'

I actually do have personal knowledge about it, and it's common knowledge. Really rich people should give their money away. Don;t be such a Republican!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hazelspapa Date: Oct 8, 2011 7:15pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Non-dead - What's more 'disgraceful'

Know I said you could have the last word, but couldn't imagine that word would be "Republican!" Ouch!
Soooo...never said the rich shouldn't give their money away. Actually, I don't even think people should be allowed to keep enough money to be considered rich (that makes me a proud Socialist). I just don't think the time to disparage someone is during the time immediately following their death. You obviously don't agree. Fine. It's your opinion, your words, your rights, and your karma, so have at it.

Out of curiousity, your gut led you to believe (inaccurately) that I am a Republican. My gut tells me you're a lawyer, probably from up North. Got into the Dead in the late 80's or 90's. Am I right? Not trying to be funny; I'm really curious. Okay, maybe a little funny, but mostly curious. Besides, if I'm right, I'm guessing you don't get the joke.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Oct 9, 2011 8:08am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Non-dead - What's more 'disgraceful'

he didn't say you were a 'republican', he said 'don't be such a republican', as in don't be such an idiot, or don't be such an irritating moralizer ... do you get it now? further, no one believes you're just 'curious', why the fuck would you be about someone you don't even know, and who you had just disparaged? but of course all this forum stuff is just a waste of time to you, which it would be for someone of your vast intellectual caliber, so sayonara hazelboy

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hazelspapa Date: Oct 9, 2011 8:52am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Non-dead - What's more 'disgraceful'

"irritating moralizer"? You're criticizing me because my first post isn't up to your standards. Maybe I should have speculated on what Jerry thought of Vince? And what I did was point out patkelleyPA's own words to him.
As far as being curious, I'm not curious about him, I'm curious if I'm right and if the current scene is the same one I abandoned in '85 (frankly, due to the kinds of attitude I'm running into here). Also, if I'm being honest, it is a poke at Mr. Kelley. Sorry, I'm not nearly as good as I aspire to be.
But, back to the original point. I simply felt a need to point out the hypocrisy of the post, in light of previous statements. My mistake was thinking 1) that he would be receptive to that and 2) not letting my initial post stand on it's own. I let his reply get to me.
I also think if you're going to criticize someone, you should know what your talking about, especially people that can't defend themselves. He does not have personal knowledge of Steve Jobs' charitible activity and it isn't common knowledge. Luarene Jobs serves on the board of many charitable organizations and is very active in several other organizations, such as Achieva, Global Fund for Women, Emerson Collective, KQED (PBS), EdVoice, PARSA and the New America Foundation. She is president and founder of the Board of College Track, and the co-founder of Terranova. One doesn't get on the board of directors for organizations like this without making substantial contributions, and Steve was the main source of income in that household. Bono has also come out to defend Steve's record since his death pointing out that his contributions have "literally transformed the lives of two million people in Africa". That's ample evidence.
Does all this make it okay for me to attack Mr. Kelley? No. I don't believe I did in my first post, so I stand by that. My 2nd post doesn't meet that standard, so I have edited it to try to recitify my mistake. Sorry, that's the best I can do. How about you?

To all forum users - The waste of time comment wasn't meant to insult anyone and it was bad judgement to include it. How you choose to spend your time is up to you, and if networking with people here is fulfilling, then great; I'm happy for you. It just isn't the kind of thing that is fulfilling to me. I don't care how others spend their time, as long as it isn't doing harm to others.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Oct 9, 2011 10:02am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Non-dead - What's more 'disgraceful'

i'm surprised that you, a self-described 'proud Socialist', would even care to defend Steve Jobs, whose wealth and influence stands out against every tenet of Socialism; odd that you defend SJ so staunchly, as though you and he were lunch buddies, which your posting would then make sense if you had been

as for my criticism of your initial posting, when you come on here with a first post and attack someone you don't even know, in the manner you did, on a forum largely devoted to topics related to the GD, which you wouldn't even be reading unless you were a fan of the music, or just plain bored silly at home or the office and looking for something out of left field to waste your time by reading, well, let's just say it all comes across as a little bizarre like trolling

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hazelspapa Date: Oct 9, 2011 11:36am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Non-dead - What's more 'disgraceful'

I'm not defending Steve Jobs. I'm actually not a fan. I'm saying I don't think it's okay to trash talk anyone who has just died, whoever they are. At least wait until the body is cold. I'm also defending the notion that you should know what the hell you're talking about before you make blanket statements about someone, again, whoever they may be. If you actually read what I'm saying you can see that. I am simply giving my opinion (like everyone else here) and pointing out some falsehoods, which I fail to understand how that is a bad thing (other than when I momentarily lapsed into a disrespectful tone in the 2nd post).

As far as the topic, I didn't start the thread, I simply responded, just as you are.

I don't feel the initial post was an attack, it was simply pointing out his own words on the subject. If that was construed as an attack, sorry, it wasn't meant that way. Personally, I want to be called out when I'm being a hypocrite. I probably crossed the line with the 2nd post, but I fixed that to the best of my ability. I'm not the one implying mental illness, calling people cowards, idiots, & trolls, or otherwise making this personal.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Oct 9, 2011 6:46pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Non-dead - What's more 'disgraceful'

well enough, no worries